RIPPER_46 said:
We played Port , Saints , Eagles first up and were 10 points off being 3-0
Playing the tigers early in the season is always a tough ask.
Which 5 did we have a better list than?
They signed him up to provide stability as there was already a faction trying to get rid of him in 2004 when we were in the top 6 fer crying out loud.
Daniher was re-signed at the end of 2003 on the back of a nine game losing streak with 5 wins for the season.
Thompson was re-signed at the end of 2003 on the back of
7 14 1 draw season.
Eddie is extending MM contract a year early.
Plenty of precedent's there.
CC had a better win ratio than all those above and still has even with having to travel accross the country every other week.
IMO the board would have been derelict NOT to keep him on.
All those statements did an excellent job to improve the crowd sizes (not necessarily the crowd) , and helped sell a vision.
That was absolutely necessary as we were broke.
No one could have forseen the bad injury run we had at the start of the year but it has been a blessing in disguise as we have rebuilt on the run and found a few players.
You gave to ask yourself why their respective clubs are struggling when they have had ample time to get their respective lists (Pagan excepted) into the sort of order that they themselves are responsible for.
Regardless of how many wins we finish with this year , blind Freddy can see that we have made progress particularly on the road and in the depth, persistance and quality of our list.
Only a stingy person would deny CC credit for that.
I think some people may have misinterpreted my earlier comments. Dwayo said that we should sign CC until 2012. I just think that while the last month has been encouraging, we must consider the calibre of the opposition and that the next 4 games will be much more challenging. At the end of the season Connolly's performance should be evaluated, not now, and not last February.
In reply to your comments Ripper-
I think nearly everyone would agree we have a better list than collingwood, carlton, richmond and port and many would agree we have a better list than Melbourne. When we play our best we can match it with any one, home or away. We have a plethora of players who can win a game off their own boot, but over the last 2 seasons unfortunately many have been inconsistent.
Why does he need to be contracted until 2007 to provide stability? The bare minimum for him to continue as our coach should be to qualify for the finals. If the board predicted he would be under pressure midseason they should have gauranteed him until the end of the season, which is when his performance should be judged. The backlash we saw after the kangaroos game wouldn't have been any greater if Connolly wasn't contracted beyond this year. People were angry not only with CC and the teams performance, but also with the board for making such an important decision hastily. It's now going to take a lot for that trust to return. People will still support the team everytime they run on to the field, but the suspicion of the board and their motives will linger.
Other coaches have had their contracts extended after poor seasons, but I would say they were re-contracted because the club thought they were on the right track, not because they thought they might receive negative media attention or because their team have a tough draw. The other clubs that extended the contracts of their coach were preventing other teams from approaching their coach, but that couldn't have been part of the equation for us because no one would be looking for a coach in February. Also the relationship between Schwabb and Connolly made people suspicious.
Sure building expectations can help boost crowds, but you have to expect a backlash if you don't deliver. In reality it's winning that gets people through the gates. If we had a less media savvy coach who had us in the top 4 from 2003-2005 I think the crowds would be as big, if not bigger than present.
Sure we did have a bad run with injuries, but that doesn't excuse some of the woeful performances we have witnessed this season. It also doesn't explain were superb in round 7 against the pies and against geelong in round 10 but were woeful in rounds 8 (essendon), 9 (hawthorn) and 11 (Brisbane).
Daniher, Malthouse and Pagan are struggling but sometimes clubs just need a change. After a while the message stops getting through and a change of coach is required. Rodney Eade is a prime example. Things clearly weren't working at the swans, but that doesn't mean he isn't a good coach. Apart from Sheedy there aren't many coaches who are at the one club for more than 7 or 8 years.
We certainly have made progress and increased our depth since CC arrived, but considering the age of our list at the start of '02 and where we have come from prior to Connollys arrival we were certain to improve. Have we made progress over the last 2 seasons? I'm not sure.
I don't have a problem with Connolly. I wish him the best and I hope that he is the man to bring success to our football club. I know we've suffered enough over the last 10 completed seasons and certainly deserve to finish the season on a high. I think that his contract extension was unwarranted when it happend but hopefully in the coming weeks the boards decision will be justified.